Timeline

Annotated timeline of publications
and events associated with faculty at TiHo

* * * * *

Institute of Animal Welfare and Behavior
University of Veterinary Medicine, Hannover (TiHo)

Institut für Tierschutz und Verhalten
der Tierärztlichen Hochschule Hannover (TiHo)


* * * * *

Revised: April 21, 2012  03:04 EST
Revised: April 24, 2012  02:46 EST
Revised: April 27, 2012  11:53 EST
Revised: May 04, 2012 00:59 EST
Revised May 14, 2012 22:27 EST
Revised June 02, 2012 20:06 EST
Revised Nov 10, 2012 22:58 GMT

1997
Behavioural testing for aggression in the domestic dog.
Applied Animal Behaviour Science 52:243-263. Netto WJ, Planta DJU.

"Aggressive behaviour in dogs is an increasing problem in The Netherlands. In an attempt to find a solution to this problem the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Conservation and Fisheries has financially supported a study aimed at developing an aggression test for dogs. The primary goal is to use the test as an instrument for excluding very aggressive individuals of certain breeds from breeding."

June 26, 2000
Six year-old Volkan Kaja of Hamburg, Germany is savaged by two dogs, a pit bull and an American Staffordshire Terrier.

July 7, 2000
Lower Saxony passes the Dangerous Dogs Act (Niedersaechsische Gefahrtierverordnung GefTVO); this law included provisions of Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) directed at a proscribed list of dangerous dogs.

August 14, 2000 -- May 16, 2001
The Veterinary School at Hannover conducts the original study which yields data from 415 listed dogs and their owners (dog-owner teams) for statistical analysis.

March 3, 2001
TiHo established at the Veterinary School, Hannover.

May 28, 2002
Fighting Dogs: History, application, attitude problems, "Bull Races" -- a literature study.
Andrea Steinfeldt (dissertation).

June 6 (July 3), 2002
Provisions of the Dangerous Dogs Act of Lower Saxony are annulled by the Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht) in Berlin.

November 20, 2002
Untersuchung des Verhaltens von 5 Hunderassen und einem Hundetypus im Wesenstest nach den Richtlinien der Niedersächsischen Gefahrtierverordnung.
Angela Mittmann publishes her doctoral thesis, a report on the testing of dogs restricted by the state of Lower Saxony, Germany. The test used by the faculty of the Veterinary School at Hannover was based on the earlier test developed by Netto and Planta (1997).

Dec 26, 2002
This discussion page (on a German pit bull discussion forum) makes several references to aggression testing of Golden Retrievers. "Andreas" refers to Johann's dissertation testing Golden Retrievers (see below, 2004) using the exact title, two years before its publication date, and three weeks before testing begins (see next entry).

January 17, 2003 -- November 18, 2003
70 Golden Retrievers were evaluated. These dogs served as a comparison group to the 415 listed dogs which were tested earlier.


May 27, 2003
Temperament Testing According to the guidelines of the Dangerous Animals Act of Lower Saxony, Germany (GefTVO) of 5th of July 2000 of five breeds of dogs and the pit bull type. Differences between biting and non-biting dogs.
Sandra Bruns (dissertation).


September, 2003
Behavior genetics of canine aggression: behavioral phenotyping of golden retrievers by means of an aggression test.
L. van den Berg. Behavior Genetics 2003; 33:469-83.

November 27, 2003
Specific intra-aggressive behavior of five breeds of dogs and the pitbull-type temperament during the testing according to the guidelines of the Dangerous Animals Act of Lower Saxony, Germany (GefTVO) of 07.06.2000.
Andrea Böttjer (dissertation).

November, 2004
Assessment of the behaviour of Golden Retrievers in comparison to the behaviour of dogs considered dangerous according to the Dangerous Animals Act of Lower Saxony, Germany (GefTVO) of 5^th of July 2000.
Tina Johann (dissertation).

May 25, 2005
Untersuchung einer Bullterrier-Zuchtlinie auf Hypertrophie des Aggressionsverhaltens.
Assessment of a Bull Terrier breed line regarding the possible occurrence of hypertrophic aggressive behavior.
Jennifer Hirschfeld (dissertation).

May 2008
Is there a difference? Comparison of golden retrievers and dogs affected by breed specific legislation regarding aggressive behaviour.
S.A. Ott, E. Schalke, A.M. von Gaertner, H. Hackbarth. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research 3: 134-140.
(NOTE: Stefanie Ott reexamines existing data from Mittmann (2002) and Johann (2004). This paper is currently available on www.fairdog.dk)

May 2008
Is breed specific legislation justified? Evaluation of the temperament test of Lower Saxony.
E. Schalke, S.A. Ott, A.M. von Gaertner, A. Mittmann. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research  3: 97-103.
(NOTE: This paper is also currently available www.bestfriends.org)

April, 2009
Assessment of a Bullterrier bloodline in the temperament test of Lower Saxony: comparison with six dog breeds affected by breed specific legislation and a control group of Golden Retrievers.
Ott S, Schalke E, Hirschfeld J, Hackbarth H.
Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr. 2009 Apr;116(4):132-7.

October 19, 2009
Aggression and Dogs: No significant difference found between breeds. E Schalke.
(NOTE: This document appears to be a pastiche. It appears on the Animal Farm Foundation website [click here], and Dr Schalke is presented as the author. SRUV has asked Dr Schalke to confirm that she is indeed the author and we are awaiting a reply.)

May, 2010
Assessment of a Bull Terrier bloodline regarding possible hypertrophic aggressive behaviour in situations of dog-dog contact of the temperament test of Lower Saxony.
Esther E Schalke, Stefanie S Ott, Jennifer J Hirschfield and Hansjoachim H Hackbarth.
Berl Munch Tierarztl Wochenschr. 2010 May-Jun;123(5-6):192-7.

"In conclusion, there were no indications for inadequate or disturbed aggressive behaviour in this Bull Terrier breed line. Furthermore, the broad majority of dogs proved to possess excellent social skills as well as the ability to communicate competently and to solve conflicts appropriately."

May 22, 2010
Four dogs savage a three-year old infant in Oldisleben-Sachsenburg, Germany. News coverage in the UK describe the dogs only as attack dogs but in German accounts they are clearly identified as four Staffordshire bull terriers.
Thuringia Interior Minister Peter Huber claims that dog lists (BSL) do not prevent attacks. On March 31, 2011, the owner received a suspended sentence of one year plus 80 hours of community service.

September 22, 2010
Development of a specific behaviour test to evaluate the impact of dog-owner relationship and dog-owner attachment on the behaviour of the dog.
Stefanie Ott (dissertation).

* * * * *

Notes:

See TiHo Index for a complete list of posts on TiHo.

Google News: Today's pit bull attacks in the US

MSPCA: III

According to the National Canine Research Council,

pit bulls are no more likely to show inappropriate

aggressive behavior than are golden retrievers.

* * * * *

Note: After publishing this post we discovered additional sources referring to the aggressive tendencies of Golden Retrievers in relation to pit bulls. We have subsequently published nearly twenty posts about the Hannover Formula, which are indexed here. While the post below may be incomplete, the details and substance of the post are accurate.

Oct 1, 2012; 21:08 GMT

* * * * *

SRUV first discovered this claim in a news item carried on WCVB, Boston's ABC television channel. The claim also appeared on the station's internet page.

The TV coverage which first carried the claim was prompted by the annual Pit Bull Awareness Month national campaign. The WCBV spot may have been prompted by outreach from Massachusetts Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (MSPCA) Advocacy Director Kara Holmquist, who is interviewed in the segment.

SRUV first checked the MSPCA web site, where we were unable to find any mention of the golden retriever claim.

Next, SRUV used Google advanced search and framed the entire sentence (as it appears at the top of the page) within quotation marks as the search query. Google returned only four instances of the sentence on the web, none of them from the National Canine Research Council (NCRC), the purported source of the information. The first hit pointed to the WCBV television newscast which originally drew our attention.

The second and third hits (as shown in the screen grab below) are parked domains on GoDaddy.com, now serving as advertising platforms. All four hits displayed the entire sentence in bold type.

The final hit pointed to Trill, an articulate inner-city blogger who recounts a pit bull attack. Trill's post is dated June 13, 2010. The NCRC golden retriever claim appears on Trill's blog in the form of a comment posted by Yana. Yana's comment is copied in it's entirety here:

Yana said...
According to the National Canine Research council, pit bulls are no more likely to show inappropriate aggressive behavior than are golden retrievers.
:)
October 15, 2011 9:28 PM 

Yana's comment appeared 2 days after the TV segment which first aired Ms Holmquist's golden retriever claim (a full year and a half after Trill's original post), just after the beginning of the MSPCA Pit Bull Awareness month.

* * * * * * * * * * 

Finally, we checked the purported source of the claim, the NCRC web site. Once again SRUV searched for the entire golden retriever claim. We were directed to two pages within the web site, which are the apparent source for the unsubstantiated claim.

The two pages are similar in many respects; the first is the search results page, and is shown in the screen grab here: 

When the Continue reading link is followed we arrive at a similar page which gives a synopsis of a Spanish study.  A careful reading reveals that NCRC has misrepresented the Spanish study, which was originally published in the Journal of Veterinary Behavior (JVB).  According to the JVB (the page can be viewed here), the authors of the Spanish study looked for owner-perceived behavioral problems in the dog population, which in effect measures owners' behavior rather than their dogs' behavior. The NCRC interpretation of the Spanish study is highly suspect, if not laughable.

Furthermore, neither of the two pages on the NCRC web page mention golden retrievers. The direct comparison of pit bulls to golden retrievers doesn't exist, either on the NCRC web page or on the MSPCA web page, and must be considered deceptive. The sentence may exist in other, internal documents, or in someone's imagination. Perhaps the sentence was an elaboration on the part of MSPCA. Or an outright fabrication.

The American public is predisposed to believe our humane organizations and SPCA's. Unfortunately, the unsubstantiated claim discussed in this post has been promulgated by MSPCA as factual. This careless, unprofessional behavior represents a clear breach of trust. We must now question whether the MSPCA has lost their way, and thus no longer has the public interest at heart.  

* * * * *

Related posts: MSPCA I; MSPCA II; The Triumvirate, Glossary

Today's pit bull attacks on Google news -- Click here!

Ledy VanKavage, Jane Berkey, Karen Delise, Kara Holmquist, BSL ineffective, Golden Retrievers

MSPCA: II

The trigger for the attack may have been a “territorial” response.

* * * * *

Normanda Torres was standing in the kitchen of her family's home on Brian Road in Bridgewater, Massachusetts, when she was attacked by Rex, the family's pit bull.

Normanda was taken to Brigham & Women's Hospital in Boston, where she remains in critical condition after several days. If she survives, she will undergo surgery for facial reconstruction. Rex was taken to the New England Animal Medical Center (NEAMC), where he was euthanized so tissue from Normanda's face could be removed from his stomach. Had the family not given permission for Rex to be euthanized, he could have been quarantined for ten days and then returned to the family.

According to Lou Berman, a hospital administrator for NEAMC, attacks by pit bulls in which human body parts are consumed by the attacking dog are extremely rare. While Mr Berman may be unaware of attacks of this intensity, they are not at all uncommon. Disfiguring and fatal pit bull attacks on humans are now occurring at the rate of two every three days.* There have been at least 16 human deaths attributed to pit bulls in the current year (Fatal Pit Bull Attacks), and numerous additional attacks which have left the victims permanently disfigured, often with the loss of tissue.

After each pit bull attack there follows a period of trying to understand the cause of the attack;  unprovoked attacks by our animal companions in our own homes are unexpected. Yet there are the inevitable, awkward attempts by pit bull advocates to explain the attack, or to deflect the public's attention from news of the attack.

According to Eric Badger, who serves as Bridgewater's animal control officer, the attack may have been triggered by a "territorial" response on the part of the pit bull. As SRUV has previously noted, the "territorial" explanation offered by Mr Badger is widely employed by pit bull advocates when there is no apparent cause for an unprovoked attack.

At the risk of explaining the obvious, SRUV will note that very few family pets respond to perceived "territorial" threats with unprovoked disfiguring attacks. Such an attack is an inherent risk of pit bull ownership.

* * * * * 

In October the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (MSPCA) launched their annual "Pit Bull Awareness" campaign; this took place within weeks after two children were killed by pit bulls in separate attacks. This annual campaign amounts to a month-long blizzard of pit bull advocacy, with the goal of placing more surplus pit bulls in family homes.

With increasing numbers of pit bulls being placed in family homes by rescues, shelters, and humane societies, the number of pit bull attacks on family members by shelter dogs has climbed to unprecedented numbers. Thirty-two people have suffered disfiguring or fatal attacks by shelter or rescue dogs since 2007, the vast majority of which were pit bulls.*  As these numbers climb, the cost of liability payouts to victims has reached millions of dollars. If Rex was adopted out by a rescue or shelter, that shelter may bear liability for this attack. In addition, the cost of insurance premiums for the shelters balloons. There are other hidden costs of these pit bull attacks, including the immeasurable human cost.

In a recent post SRUV called on MSPCA to cease placing pit bulls in family homes, and to cease all media and legislative advocacy for pit bulls. SRUV suggested that the resources be used instead for legitimate humane causes. Furthermore, SRUV calls upon the MSPCA and other humane agencies to establish funds for the human and animal victims of pit bull attacks. The wheels of bureaucracy turn slowly, but we hope that the news of attacks like the attack on Normanda, which will occur again today or tomorrow, will encourage the MSPCA to finally act.

* * * * *

Related posts: MSPCA, Rapid Response
News source: Woman mauled by pit bull  (Enterprise News)
                      and other sources
Today's pit bull attacks on Google news -- Click here!

* Statistical and other information included in this post is from
   More Adoptions Will Not End Shelter Killing of Pit Bulls,
   the editorial feature of Animal People, October 2011, pg 3.


Bridgewater MA pit bull attack; New England Animal Medical Center, NEAMC, facial disfigurement

Trigger

Revised: July 1, 2013; 14:32 GMT

The owner of the pit bulls can certainly reclaim these animals . . . 

* * * * * 

The owner referred to is Melissa Andrews. Andrews is charged with one count of failure to vaccinate and two counts of animal at large, all misdemeanors. She had been keeping her two pit bulls in her basement.

The two dogs had been quarantined at Forsyth County Animal Shelter after entering a pasture at 3620 Watson Road, Cumming, Georgia on October 11 and attacking Trigger, an American Paint horse.

"When deputies responded to the location one of the dogs was still attached to the horse’s mouth … just literally hanging on," said Forsyth County Sheriff’s Lt. David Waters.

Veterinarian Dr. Lanier Orr was called to the pasture and attempted to close the wounds and stem the extensive bleeding. Trigger suffered for six hours as Dr Orr provided emergency care in the pouring rain, before succumbing to her wounds.

New Dangerous Dog Laws were recently passed in the county, which require owners of Dangerous Dogs to obtain a $50,000 surety bond for each dog as well as build a fenced-in area with concrete floors and a top to prevent them from digging or climbing out. But Dangerous Dog Laws do not effectively remove dangerous dogs from a community.

"The owner of the pit bulls can certainly reclaim these animals. . . " said Lt. Waters.

Laws which allow an irresponsible owner to reclaim pit bulls after having killed a horse do not protect the community. They do not protect humans nor do they protect our more vulnerable animal companions such as Trigger.

Yet advocates of pit bulls and other fighting breeds are strong proponents of laws which return these dogs to the safety and comfort of their homes, even after filling a horse, and leave the victims with no recourse.


* * * * *

Source: Appen Newspapers, Forsyth News

MSPCA

To: The Board of Directors, MSPCA
      The Board of Overseers, MSPCA
      Drake Bennett, The Boston Globe; Kay Lazar, The Boston Globe
      Stephen J Murphey, Boston City Council, At-large
      Robert Consalvo, Boston City Council
      and others

During the month of October the MSPCA is conducting a campaign to "elevate the status of Pit Bulls in our community." A segment aired on a local TV channel, apparently prompted by a MSPCA press release, which featured an interview with MSPCA advocacy director Kara Holmquist. The timing of the campaign is particularly awkward in light of fact that pit bulls killed two children in the week preceding the MSPCA campaign.

The TV segment included misinformation and incorrect assertions, and failed to mention that pit bulls have killed a total of at least sixteen humans this year.  The segment also failed to acknowledge the hundreds of attacks, many of them fatal, on our more vulnerable animal companions. Pit bulls have been bred for centuries for the express purpose of fighting to the death, but pit bull advocates would now have us believe this genetic trait has disappeared.

When it comes to pit bulls, humane societies are engaged in a zero-sum game. Backyard breeders produce a surplus of pit bulls, many of which ultimately end up in humane shelters. Meanwhile, the South continues to export thousands of unwanted dogs (many of them pit bulls) to cities in the north where they are more likely to be adopted. Shelters everywhere are under increased pressure to avoid euthanasia and therefore find it necessary to mount extraordinary campaigns, such as the current MSPCA "Pit Bull Awareness Month," to place pit bulls in family homes.

SPCA's across the country find themselves under similar pressures, and the campaign to improve the image of the pit bull has been an ongoing campaign for years, with the humane societies slowly losing ground to the dogfighters and backyard breeders. Untold resources are devoted to the problem (as can be seen on this MSPCA page), which could otherwise be invested in legitimate humane services. All this wasted treasure does nothing to solve the larger problem.

We urge the MSPCA to suspend all efforts to place pit bulls in family environments. Furthermore, we urge the MSPCA to suspend all advocacy in behalf of the pit bull, including legislative and lobbying efforts in their behalf. Suspending pit bull advocacy programs would allow the MSPCA to redirect resources to new or underfunded programs. A fund for the human and animal victims of pit bull attacks is an idea whose time has come; MSPCA could provide a beacon for other SPCAs by initiating such a program.

The MSPCA has a long and distinguished history of animal advocacy. Your leadership on this issue can lead the way to a safe, less cruel environment for our animal companions and for ourselves.

* * * * *

Related Posts: Natural Consequences, Discredited Sources
Today's pit bull attacks on Google news -- Click here!
Related News Story: WCVB TV5

Gameness: VII

A neighbor then brought Agostinelli a pitchfork, . . . . 

* * * * * *

Bob Agostinelli was walking his dog Shanny, a 28-pound Shetland Sheepdog mix, at Pearl and York Streets when the pit bull charged. I stepped in front of my dog but he went around me and latched onto my dog's tail end, said Agostinelli.


Agostinelli went to the ground and punched the pit bull several times, then stood and started kicking the attacking dog. Several neighbors came with sticks and other items to use as weapons. Agostinelli broke two sticks over the dog's back, with no effect.


Shanny broke from the pit bull, but the pit bull caught Shanny at his throat. A neighbor then brought Agostinelli a pitchfork, which he drove into the pit bull's head. The pit bull held his grip on Shanny's throat. A police officer arrived and shot the wounded pit bull.


* * * * * *

The following comment is one of dozens attached to the story which defended the attacking dog and pit bulls in general:

Posted by OdieBaker1 at 10:16PM on Wednesday, 10/12/11 Wow! To all you hateful ungrateful people out there...you should all be ashamed of yourselves! I pray that God forgives you all. When I first read this article it mad me furious that people actually consider animal cruelty to be ok...its not! This dog was wrongfully killed! Hello Ottawa Police Deartment....have you ever heard of pepper spray or less lethal munitions?!?!? This dog did not have to be killed or brutally beaten by Lassie's owner! I hope the officer that shot this dog can sleep at night after wrongfully killing a family pet/ a family member/ bestfriend/ a childs pet! My thoughts and prays go out to the pitbulls ownwers! Sorry for your loss and even more sorry that you have to read some of the garbage people are posting.

* * * * * *

Source: The Times (Ottawa)

Rapid Response

The incident Monday was not a pit bull issue.

* * * * * 

The article in the Amarillo Globe News (Tuesday Oct 4th, by Yann Ranaivo) followed by one day the death of an 11-day old infant after it was attacked by a pit bull. Ranaivo's piece is well written and stylistically sophisticated. In many ways  it is representative of typical pit bull advocacy articles following an attack.

The article is divided into two parts, which are nearly equal in length. The first half consists of the recent history of dog attacks in Amarillo. According to the article, pit bulls account for three times as many bites as the the breeds with the next-highest reports of attacks.

Then, in a remarkable transition, the article closes the first section with a barrage of undisguised advocacy statements, beginning with the line at the top of the page. It continues:

This was about an animal and an infant. . . . . It could have been any dog that was not properly introduced to the infant.

This transition is one of the more adroit pit bull advocacy maneuvers witnessed by SRUV, and one of the most effective. It not only ignores all the preceding dog bite data: it displaces it and attempts to make it irrelevant.

* * * * *

The second half of the article then goes on to interview three pit bull advocates at length.

* Shannon Barlow, Assistant Director of Amarillo Animal Control
The first of three advocates presented in the article is Shannon Barlow. The incident, as Shannon Barlow refers to it in the line at the top of this page and in the excerpts above, is the death of an eleven-day old infant, which Barlow otherwise fails to mention. Ms Barlow would have us believe that although a pit bull attacked a child and the child died, it is not a pit bull incident.

Readers of SRUV are aware of previous uses of the Any Dog argument used by Ms Barlow. In her efforts to take our attention away from the fact that a pit bull killed a child, Ms Barlow would have us believe that it could just as well have been a Yorkshire Terrier than mauled the infant to death. Theoretically, yes, it could have been any dog that killed the infant, and pigs might fly. The fact remains that it was a pit bull that mauled the infant, one of two infant deaths from pit bull attacks within a week, and one of sixteen fatal pit bull attacks during the current year. Pit bull advocates are seemingly incapable of acknowledging these deaths.

* Cydney Cross, President of Out of the Pits
Ms Cross is called upon to convince us that "pit bulls aren't naturally aggressive." Although the article gives only seven sentences to Ms Cross, she manages to repeat six of the basic refrains of pit bull advocacy. There is nothing new under the sun, and  SRUV will not bore our readers by repeating them. Ms Cross represents one of dozens (if not hundreds) of pit bull advocacy groups around the country. Members of these groups are called upon to defend their breed of obsession after similar attacks, in what is apparently an organized rapid response effort. We wonder what these people do for a living.

* Loralei Zwitt, dog behaviorist and owner of My Dog and Me
The interview with Ms Zwitt is dominated by the canine psychobabble that has unfortunately become more prevalent recently.  Ms Zwitt's comments essentially find an excuse for any poor behavior on the part of a dog. SRUV will remind Ms Zwitt that high-pitched sounds and similar annoyances do not provoke other breeds to kill infants.

* * * * *

As we have noted elsewhere, after nearly every pit bull attack articles similar to this one appear like mushrooms. But Mr Ranaivo's piece is different, in its scope and intent. Few articles call upon more than one or two pit bull advocates. Few articles integrate dog attack statistics to disarm the reader, then dismiss the data so cavalierly. Few articles that follow an infant's death are so callous in presenting pit bull advocacy. Mr Ranaivo is hereby nominated for the SRUV Hall of Shame.

* * * * *

Related post: Natural Consequences
Source: Amarillo Globe News

Home Invasion: II

It was three times the size of Biddy. The pit bull 

grabbed Biddy with her mouth and had her by the neck.

* * * * * 

Andrea Brodhead was with her four-year old granddaughter when she heard a signal from the house alarm, indicating someone had come in. Then she was confronted by the pit bull.


The pit bull grabbed Biddy, a small mixed-breed terrier, by the neck. Brodhead called 911 while her son Beau, a defensive back for the St. Thomas More high school football team, fought off the pit bull with a stool. They were ultimately able to isolate the pit bull in the house's sun room. Then she just went and laid on my couch like she was accustomed to being in a house.


Virginia Lee, the local Animal Control supervisor, said Lafayette Parish is one of the state's hotspots for dog fighting. It's not uncommon for people to abandon dogs, in particular old fighting dogs, at secluded drop spots around the parish.


* * * * * 


Source: The Republic

John Paul Massey

Revised:   Oct 3, 23:21

* * * * * * *

It's difficult to draw meaningful lessons from the short  life of John Paul Massey. But the enormity of this tragedy is too poignant to ignore.

At the inquest into the toddler's death the Liverpool coroner, Andre Rebello, said that Helen Foulkes had fought "heroically" to save the four-year old. Helen Foulkes is John Paul's grandmother. Angela McGlynn, John Paul's mother, also referred to her mother as a hero.

But with further reading this picture of heroism becomes clouded. Is it possible for the person who creates a dangerous environment for a child, to be considered a hero when the child is killed? Uno, the pit bull that killed John Paul, was owned by Christian Foulkes, John Paul's uncle. Uno and a second pit bull lived in the house with Helen Foulkes, John Paul's grandmother, where the murder occurred.

Christian Foulkes was later jailed for possessing and breeding pit bulls. The grandmother received a suspended sentence for possession of the pit bulls.

This disorienting mashup of circumstance, irresponsibility, and cloying sentimentality is enough to make a reader turn away in despair, but there is more. Britain, where the crime occurred, is a country with loosely enforced (or unenforced) Dangerous Dog Laws (DDL).  The police had been informed of dangerous dogs being bred at the house and had failed to respond.

At the inquest Mr Rebello said:

After death Uno was classified as a dangerous dog within the meaning of the Dangerous Dogs Acts of 1991. Whether Uno would have been present if the police had investigated is speculative and unknown.

An expert dog handler also spoke at the court hearing to claim that Uno may have been trying to move up in the family hierarchy.

Has nature turned? What is the natural order, when a dog expert speculates on Uno's motives for murdering a child, but we aren't to speculate on how that child's death might have been prevented?

Is it useless to speculate on what might have happened if the police had investigated? Should we not wonder what might have happened if the dogs had been removed? Should we not wonder about the miserable lives of Christian and Helen Foulkes, who would keep and breed pit bulls in the same house frequented by a young toddler?

The Foulkes flagrantly endangered the life of John Paul, their son, nephew, and grandson. It's  evident that the Dangerous Dog Laws did nothing to protect John Paul, with tragic results.

* * * * * *

See Also: BSL Scholarship, Dangerous Dog Laws
Source: Liverpool Echo

Escape Artists: VII

He said he hasn't heard from her since.

* * * * * *

On the afternoon of Aug. 31, 85-year old Joseph Marshall Thompson took Roscoe to his favorite playground, which they've gone to for the past 13 years.

When Thompson opened the back door of his car to let Roscoe out three pit bulls charged him, according to a Baltimore County police report. Police said Thompson was knocked to the ground and bitten and clawed on both hands and legs as he tried to cradle his daughter's dog in an effort to protect it.

Authorities said the pit bulls attacked the schnauzer, tearing its windpipe and biting into its spine and breaking several of the dog's ribs and damaging its lungs.

Thompson said he considered Roscoe the equivalent of a grandson.

The owner is a Caucasian woman in her 20s with light hair who's about 5 feet 4 inches tall and weighs 130 pounds.

* * * * *

Source: WBAL TV

Ax3 Redux

The APDT is fully aware that any dog can bite,
 any dog can maim, and any dog can kill.

* * * * *

Readers of  SRUV will recall Michael Linke's memorable phrase Any dog is capable of any act, at any point in time. We thought Mr Linke's phrase so excessively . . . grandiose, that we've given it a kicky shortcut, Ax3.

Now SRUV has learned that the Association of Pet Dog Trainers (APDT) has coined a phrase that also employs the triple repetition of the Any meme. The APDT claim that  Any dog can bite, any dog can maim, and any dog can kill is, if anything, even more deluded than Linke's statement.

What is it with pit bull advocates and the adjective Any?

And what is it with the ritualized, prayer-like phrases that are meant to convey that there are no differences between breeds?

While Linke's phrase is simply silly, the APDT version is dark, ominous. It speaks to us only of mayhem. Should we fear all of our animal companions? Linke's phrase, a hyperbolic elaboration of the long-time favorite All Dogs Bite, implies that pit bulls are no more dangerous than chihuahuas, which experience tells us is false. The APDT construction, on the other hand, inverts logic by implying that chihuahuas are every bit as dangerous as pit bulls, that they can maim and kill just as readily as a pit bull. The phrase strikes fear into our hearts, regardless of the intention.

With this statement the APDT has, perhaps without fully realizing it, acknowledged how dangerous pit bulls are.

Here is the full passage:

The APDT is fully aware that any dog can bite, any dog can maim, and any dog can kill. A dangerous or vicious dog is a product of a combination of individual genetics, upbringing, socialization, and lack of proper training. The solution to preventing dog bites is education of owners, breeder, and the general public about aggression prevention, not legislation directed at certain breeds.

The APDT has strained to construct an argument against BSL and in so doing has defied reason and ignored their own words. They understand that dogs are a product of, in part, their genetics, but in the next sentence the APDT assigns all responsibility for aggression to the owners, breeders, and the general public.

By this logic, the victim of a pit bull attack (presumably a member of the general public) is responsible for his own injury.


* * * * *

Statistics:
Statistics quoted on SRUV are from the nation's authoritative source for current dog attack statistics, the 32+ year, continuously updated Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada.
View or download the current PDF

Record 33 fatal pit bull attacks & 459 disfigurements in 2015

Pit bulls killed 24,000 other dogs & 13,000 cats in 2015

2015 Dog Bite Related Fatalities (Daxton's Friends)

Fatal Pit Bull Attacks

Today's pit bull attacks

Definitions:
SRUV uses the definition of "pit bull" as found in the Omaha Municipal Code Section 6-163. As pit bulls are increasingly crossed with exotic mastiffs, Catahoula Leopard Dogs and other breeds, the vernacular definition of "pit bull" must be made even more inclusive.

Sources cited by news media sometimes refer to "Animal Advocates" or sometimes "Experts." In many cases these words are used to refer to single-purpose pit bull advocates who have never advocated for any other breeds or species of animals. Media would be more accurate to refer to these pit bull advocates as advocates of fighting breeds.

Similarly, in many cases pit bull advocates refer to themselves as "dog lovers" or "canine advocates" and media often accepts this usage. The majority of these pit bull advocates are single-purpose advocates of fighting breeds.


-->-->
-->

BSL Scholarship

Our collective attitude toward our animal companions began to change with the publication of Peter Singer's Animal Liberation in 1975. The Animal Legal Defense Fund was founded in 1979 and animal law courses are currently taught in over a hundred law schools in the US.

SRUV recently reviewed the scholarship related to Breed Specific Legislation (BSL); we've included a brief bibliography below and more titles can be viewed here and in the relevant scholarly and legal databases.

* * * * * 

Attacking the Dog-Bite Epidemic: Why Breed-Specific Legislation Won't Solve the Dangerous-Dog Dilemma; Hussain, Safia Gray. 74 Fordham Law Review 2847

Canine Profiling: Does Breed-Specific Legislation Take a Bite out of Canine Crime; Pratt, Heather K. 108 Penn State Law Review 855

Dangerous Dog Laws: Failing to Give Man's Best Friend a Fair Shake at Justice; McNeely, Cynthis A.; Linquist, Sarah A. 3 J. Animal L. 99

Panic Policy Making: Canine Breed Bans in Canada and the United States; Hunter, Susan; Brisbin, Richard A. Prepared for delivery at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the Western Political Science Association.

Dog Bite Injury: an investigation into the effectiveness of regulation, Watson, Linda (Thesis)

Pit Bull Bans and the Human Factors Affecting Canine Behavior; Medlin, Jamey; 56 Depaul Law Review, 1285

* * * * * *

SRUV will not characterize all animal law scholarship, but a look at one paper is illuminating. The following paragraph serves as the opening of Irrationality Unleashed: The Pitfalls of Breed-Specific Legislation (Swann, Kristen E.  78 UMKC L. Rev. 839). The Introduction is titled A Tale of Two "Pitties" and begins:

A young woman struggles with an overfull trash bag in a chilly, hissing rain. Hefting the bag into the trash bin behind her apartment building, she hears weak but insistent mewling. Seven impossibly tiny puppies huddle in the wet detritus behind the container. The woman whistles several times to summon the pups' mother. No dog appears. The listless dogs cannot survive in the damp cold. She retrieves a basket lined with towels from her apartment and . . . . 

This three-hankie tear-jerker qualified for the Law Review?

* * * * * *

What is immediately apparent is the mind-numbing tedium of so much of the research on this subject.  It is almost as if the scholars are repeating the same ideas to one another, over and over. This selection of titles, and the excerpt above, do not inspire confidence in current animal law scholarship.

* * * * * *

Related Material:
Related post: Dangerous Dog Laws, DDL
See also: Bioethics (Wikipedia)

Overview of "breed specific" laws, Kenneth Phillips, Dog Bite Law

Statistics:
Statistics on SRUV are from the 30+ year, continuously updated Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, published by Animal People. To view or download the current PDF click here. This page may also include information from Dogsbite and Fatal Pit Bull Attacks.

Information on euthanasia rates is from Pit bulls and Political Recklessness, by Merritt Clifton. Shelter  intake and euthanasia rates are published annually in the July/August edition of Animal People.

Google News: Today's pit bull attacks






-->-->
>

Escape Artists: VI

Sept 8th, 2011


About 7 a.m. on Saturday, 41-year old Craig Higgins took his Alaskan Malamute, Belle, to Aptos Junior High School for their usual romp.


Three off-leash pit bulls attacked Higgins and Bella. The pit bulls' owner, who wore a flannel shirt and had a "horseshoe" mustache, was several hundred yards away. Craig received  numerous bites as he tried to separate the dogs.


The pit bulls' owner, who was described as a white man in his late 40s or early 50s, eventually took his three dogs to a silver sport-utility vehicle in the parking lot, and drove off.

"He ran and left my husband there bleeding," said Priscilla Higgins. Craig had more than 20 wounds on his legs and hands that could not be closed with stitches. Craig has been unable to work and the Higgins have had to cover the medical bills.

The pit bulls were described as standard size of 35 to 50 pounds. Anyone with information about the attack please call animal control officials at 454-7303 ext 1.

* * * * * * * * 


Source: Santa Cruz Sentinel

DDL

SRUV recently initiated a series of posts on Dangerous Dog Laws (DDL) with this post. The comments to the post are worthy of note, and are posted below for those who may have missed them.

* * * * * 

Dorothea Malm said...

This is a great series to undertake! DDL have become more prevalent recently, and it seems to be working for all types of dogs excepting gripping/fighting breeds.

The fact that DDLs don't address egregious kinds of attacks like the one described here - launching out of a car to disembowel - clearly shows they can address normal dogs, but not gripping/fighting dogs.

August 31, 2011 8:13 PM 

Janelle Jerman said...

Thank you for undertaking this series. I am so saddened and disgusted by the city of Arvada's response to the attack on my Uno. The deputy chief of police told me that animal control could have removed the pit bull who killed Uno after the attack on Kim Greene's dog, but left it up to the discretion of the animal control officer in charge of her case. This is in spite of a THREE YEAR history of complaints and citations (including TWO dangerous and vicious dog citations and a court appearance) over this animal! If the laws that are already in place aren't even enforced with consistency or common sense then how can we keep our companion animals safe? How can a community remain safe from preventable attacks such as this? DDL NEED to have specificity to prevent tragedies like ours from happening again.

September 4, 2011 12:13 PM 

* * * * * * * 

Related post: Repeat Offender

Good For Dogs

I don't know why I'm still surprised at how illogical 

and contradictory professional pit bull haters can be.

 -- Mike Bailey, comment on The Conversation

* * * * * 

Hello Mike,

Thank you for your work on behalf of our animal companions with Goodfordogs.org.

I agree that the comment to which you refer was not our finest moment. It left us longing for a retroactive delete function. We could plead too much coffee but excuses are cowardly.

While acknowledging this, we at the same time take exception to your use of the phrase "professional pit bull haters." SRUV is assuredly not professional, as anyone can see from a cursory glance. SRUV could benefit from your skills not only as a web administrator, but also as an animal welfare professional.

My larger concern is your use of the ad hominem fallacy: pit bull hater. You may be aware that SRUV has considered at length the rhetoric of the pit bull advocacy movement, where hater is a common epithet. To dehumanize individuals in this manner is, as we know from our long histories, a device used . . . . . well, do I need to go on? In the pit bull wars the term haters is used to disparage those who advocate for our more vulnerable animal companions while also advocating for public safety.

You also claim that SRUV, as presumed pit bull haters, are illogical. In reply I could argue  that it is not illogical to argue for the public safety, in view of the fact that pit bulls have killed at least twelve people already (by September 1) in the US this year, and have also attacked hundreds of companion animals and humans. I invite you to read a few SRUV posts to see if we are indeed illogical, or if we can be accused of using  inflammatory rhetoric.

Thanks again for your good work. Regards,
SRUV

* * * * *

Related post:  RSPCA Act
See also:  Good for Dogs, Mike Bailey

Sunday Concert

Marianne Hamilton, co-chairwoman of Music in the Park, said onlookers described a frightening scene where the pit bull "had [the terrier] by the neck, shaking it back and forth."

* * * * * * * * * * * 

To: Los Gatos Mayor Joe Pirzynski

      Los Gatos Town Council

Dear Mayor Pirzynski,

I read of the recent dog attack at the Civic Center in the Mercury News with great interest.

On the same day a similar attack occurred in Seattle; a dachshund and its owner were pulled to the ground by an attacking pit bull.  Passersby came to their assistance.

In the Seattle incident the pit bull had been adopted out by "the pound." Whether this refers to the city animal shelter or a humane society is not yet known. I suspect the owner of the Los Gatos dog revealed a similar history, when he left a message on the Mayor's telephone the following morning. 

The number of rescued pit bulls which are claimed to be "rehabilitated" and then are adopted out as safe family dogs has become a national scandal.  Humane Societies and rescue organizations that place pit bulls in family homes are facing increased liability as the number of attacks increases.

Animal control at the local level is also accountable for the growing number of attacks. In neither the Los Gatos attack nor the Seattle attack were the dogs removed from their owners, and neither owner was cited. Often attacking dogs are returned to the owners without prejudice, and the victims are left with no recourse.

These are only two of the countless attacks that have occurred in recent days.  Many municipalities are unwilling or unable to pass Breed Specific Legislation. Stronger oversight of rescue organizations will become a necessity as the liability for dog attacks is spread across humane organizations and civic institutions.

* * * * *

Related posts:  Shock and Awe, Escape Artist

Related story: Sacramento jury awards nearly $1 million to pit bull attack victim
Liability: Strict liability for dog attacks

* * * * * * * * * * *

Compiled from various news sources including the Mercury News

Tool Box

Revised: Jan 25, 2013; 16:46 GMT

(Note: This is an outdated post and links may be invalid.)

Pit bull advocates are given to misstatement: pit bulls are commonly referred to as the world's most maligned breed.

This is hyperbole. Pit bulls enjoy the services of one of the world's largest and most sophisticated public relations machines, which is constantly burnishing their reputation. Advocacy groups employ staff attorneys, public relations staff, legislative lobbyists, and writers. Pit bulls enjoy the support and prestige of the most venerable humane institutions in the country, and the support of generous donors with deep pockets. They have a slick documentary movie, and TV shows about them. Best Friends, aided by a $240,000 grant from PetSmart Charities, has recently launched another campaign, Pit Bulls: Saving America's Dogs, to combat the perceived "media-driven bad reputation." Animal Farm Foundation has launched the I Am The Majority Project, despite the fact a majority of Americans do not want to live next door to a pit bull. The campaign in behalf of pit bulls may be the largest public relations campaign in behalf of any animal since Dumbo.

This effort presents a glaring contradiction: if pit bulls are as excellent as the advocates make them out to be, if the breed is really deserving of this investment of time and treasure, wouldn't it be self-evident to everyone? Would the campaign be necessary? The pit bull advocates have created a conundrum that turns back in on itself like Möbius strip.

The advocates obviously are investing in this campaign, which has continued without pause for years. Does this imply that there are problems the advocates have yet to overcome? And if there are problems, is the breed of obsession really deserving of all this expertise and effort?

We wonder at the motives for the campaign. Why would any animal welfare society or humane institution support the breed that is responsible for more human deaths than all other breeds combined?* Why would any respected institution promote public policy that is detrimental to the public safety?

* * * * * * * * * *

The following list represents a small fraction of the resources available for pit bull advocates.

Best Friends: Tools to Use

Animal Farm Foundation: Community Resources

Partners in Shelter Services: Materials, downloads, pit ed CAMPS, etc.

BSL News: Talking Points page.

Love-a-Bull: anti-BSL page

American Kennel Club: Government Relations Toolbox

ASPCA: BSL page

Humane Society of the US: Pit Bull Resources

Pit Bull Rescue Center: Anti-BSL resource page

Dog Holocaust:  MASSIVE page of resources

and hundreds, perhaps thousands, of other advocacy blogs and websites. These efforts consume resources which are consequently denied to humane services for other breeds.

But there is another tool which every responsible pit bull owner should have:

 

This device is known variously as a "Break stick" or "Parting stick" and is widely available for sale on the web. It is inserted into the pit bull's mouth behind the molars and pressure is exerted upward against the palete. If you have one handy, and if you can manage it in the midst of a dogfight or attack on a human, it might be of help. It is the only known way to remove a pit bull from its victim. Electronic parting sticks are also available.


* * * * *
Notes:

* Statistics are from Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada, published by Animal People. To view or download the current PDF click here.

Photo courtesy of Catchdog Release tool.


.

Open Letter to ASI

Revised: January 28, 2015; 18:54 GMT

To: Ken Shapiro, Executive Director, ASI (Animals & Society Institute)
      ASI Board of Directors
      ASI Executive Committee
      HAS USA scholars
      HAS European scholars
      A Potts, A Beck, J Serpell, K Weil, L Gruen, P Armstrong,
      Merritt Clifton, and many others

ASI has positioned itself as an organization poised and capable of being a “major player in the new stage of development” of the animal advocacy movement.

            In order to transform these commercial, religious, academic,
           and other interests, the movement must put forward credible
           economic, political, legal, philosophical, and scientific
           arguments.

 Few would argue that the animal advocacy movement is, as ASI points out, at a turning point. Perhaps the most critical legislative issue we'll face over the next decade is (for many) how we will deal with the proliferation of fighting dogs in our daily life.

Your web site notes that the advocacy movement began in 1975 with the publication of Peter Singer's book Animal Liberation. There is a harsh irony in this, because 1975 is the year that pit bull terriers began emerging from the fighting pits,  into the mainstream pet population. It was entirely natural that the emerging advocacy movement would come to the defense of these dogs who were,  to advocates,  refugees from a harsh history. Many of us at the time thought pit bulls were, at heart, like any other dog.

The animal advocacy movement has been so successful in sustained defense of pit bulls that the belief that pit bulls are like any other dog persists despite the preponderance of evidence amassed for more than 35 years that in some significant respects they are behaviorally quite different.  Much of the humane movement unequivocally continues to fight any form of breed-specific legislation,  even leash laws which would only require heavier leashes for pit bulls. Meanwhile,  four people have died  from pit bull attacks in the first seven weeks of 2011; dozens have been seriously mauled. Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk.

Animal shelters in urban areas have at times been overwhelmed with dogs; at least 25% of whom are abandoned and abused pit bulls. Dogs are transferred by the truckload out of Los Angeles up the coast to Seattle and into Canada. Dogs (of all breeds) are moved from Florida to Maine, from Georgia to New England, and from San Francisco to New York.  Chartered airplanes routinely fly dogs across the country in an effort to avoid euthanasia. Vast human and financial resources have been exhausted in the process and there is little or no assurance that the dogs will avoid euthanasia in the end. The rescue groups and the humane movement are on a hamster wheel, desperately trying to keep ahead of the backyard breeders. Yet these are the same animal advocates who fight common-sense legislation to ban backyard breeders of pit bulls.

The ASI's Animals' Platform page continues: There are significant lessons to be learned from the U.K. animal protection movement, which since 1976 has used the opportunity of general elections to form coalitions and advance a “manifesto for animals.”  There is indeed much to learn from the UK, which formed the first SPCA. Need we point out that one of the accomplishments since 1976 has been the passage of the Dangerous Dogs Act of 1991, which imposes some limitations on specific breeds? US humane agencies have parted ways with their brethern in the UK and other commonwealth countries since 1976. Perhaps that's because the British have a greater historical understanding of pit bulls and the genetics of fighting dogs.

Finally, we would take issue with ASI's claim that it is an “independent think tank.” Your policy paper Dog Bites: Problems and Solutions, was written with the assistance of Animal Farm, a vocal advocate in the increasingly contentious BSL quandary. This book is not a serious piece of work.  A truly independent body would decline such assistance and influence, and we urge ASI to renounce this book and refuse all such support in the future.

With this letter we are launching a campaign, requesting the humane movement, the advocacy groups, and legislators to engage in a reappraisal of our collective views toward pit bulls and BSL. ASI is one of the few institutions capable of helping us achieve this goal, but it would require a radical realignment of your priorities. Yet we am optimistic enough to hope that within a few years ASI will commission research to study why humans defend so tenaciously these dogs, when clearly such devotion is not beneficial to the humane movement, to the animal kingdom, or to humankind.

In the coming weeks we will address similar challenges to the AVMA and all their state affiliates, the newly established American Society of Veterinary Journalists, to the Humane Societies, to Guide Dog Associations, to State and local law enforcement associations, to state and federal Child Protection Services, to corporate and individual charitable donors, and to newspapers and responsible journalists.

Perhaps ASI will serve as a beacon in this forthcoming discussion and lead all of us to a new perspective on public safety. Perhaps ASI will lead us to the realization that as animal advocates, we can fulfill our moral and ethical responsibilities as animal stewards by a wiser use of our resources, by directing our compassionate care to the animals who are often the victims of pit bull attacks, and by finally acting to diminish the number of those attacks.

Next post in ASI thread

* * * * * 

Statistics:

2014 Year-end report of dog attacks
   Animals 24-7; January 3, 2015
32 years of logging fatal & disfiguring dog attacks
   Animals 24-7; September 27, 2014

Statistics quoted on SRUV are from the nation's authoritative source for current dog attack statistics, the 30+ year, continuously updated Dog attack deaths and maimings, U.S. & Canada.
View or download the current PDF

This page may also include information fromDogsbite and Fatal Pit Bull Attacks.

Google News: Today's pit bull attacks

2014 Dog Bite Related Fatalities on Daxton's Friends

Index of canine fatalities on Daxton's Friends

-->-->

-->